Downloading it and not paying for it is really punishing the publisher, and it isn't their fault. The Australian government is the one causing the problems. Now if you can't import the US/UK version without risking jail/a fine then ok, maybe it is your only way to play. But if importation is possible, it would seem that is the way to go. Show the AUS government how stupid their policies are and support game makers.

In many cases, graphics arent as good as close source games, but in many open source games are you have more fun time than in the close source ones (many are pretty, but boring or too short/buggy to be fun)

What? Most known open source games are just ports of the best closed source games like Civilization, SimCity, Quake or Theme Hospital. On top of having sucky graphics, open source games are way too repetitive and all the open source shooters try to mimic Quake. Which is boring in 2011. Where is just as much fun open source multiplayer game than Team Fortress 2 is? Or Battlefield 3/Modern Warfare 3 online? Grand Theft Auto? Assassins Creed? Deus Ex? Portal? Left4Dead? Skyrim? The list goes on and on... Hell,

Call it flamebait, but the parent has a point - Cube 2, Nexuiz, Tremulous, etc all play almost exactly like Quake 3, and in some cases the graphics aren't much better. Some more modern games like NetDevil Warmonger are more tech demos (that one is based on proprietary Unreal 3 tech, as well). Many of the best free games do mimic popular commercial games.

That said, there are a few that have some merit, like the Battle For Westnoth. It takes a lot of work to make commercial quality games, even though some com

I dont really understand how its punishing the publisher in this case. Like any piracy, there isn't any theft (piracy isn't theft unless you somehow take someone elses copy of them) , but unlike regular piracy, there isn't even an oportunity lost. There can be no lost transaction when the publisher *cant* make a transaction in the first place.

Well, if you're going by that logic, then just about everything is a lost opportunity. Why are you playing sports instead of buying company X's video game!? Why did you buy my competitor's video game? You should have bought mine! Why did you just download that free game instead of buying mine? Why didn't you give me all of your money?

That makes no sense. Either I want to play game A and game B (and game C... but have a limited budget and can only afford 1, 2 or whatever of them), or I really am only interested in game A. If game A is unavailable, the industry is losing out by me pirating game A, because I will still likely spend my money to obtain games B, C etc to the extent I can afford in the first case (I wanted to play them all); Or I'll not spend my money on the other games because they never interested me in the first place. Peop

It's not completely victimless. It's lost opportunity to other game developers since you're playing some other game you pirated instead of getting theirs.

It's no opportunity lost, as it's not an either/or situation. You could still get the other game developers game (if you were inclined to do so in the first place) as well as pirating the one that you are unable to acquire legitimately.

It's not completely victimless. It's lost opportunity to other game developers since you're playing some other game you pirated instead of getting theirs.

It's no opportunity lost, as it's not an either/or situation. You could still get the other game developers game (if you were inclined to do so in the first place) as well as pirating the one that you are unable to acquire legitimately.

This would be true if everyone had infinite amount of time and endless interest in playing games. But we don't, and the pirated game is decreasing the time and interest you have to play other games. It's not really complicated.

The point implied by my statement, it that if someone was really that interested in the other game in the first place, they'd get it. The alternative to illegally downloading and playing a game that is unable to be obtained in any other way isn't limited to purchasing and playing a game by other game developers. Perhaps I'm not interested, at that point in time, in purchasing and playing another game, perhaps I'd rather stare at my navel or go on a hike, etc.So as another poster pointed out, in your line of

I also liked "The exact percentage is unknown", implying there is a known inexact percentage. Your insistence that "that effect certainly exists" is merely an assumption on your part. You're entitled to your opinion, of course. It's just that you're appealing to ignorance with your argument, in that you are ignoring the entire central piece of this, which is that the Australian government has banned that title from the Australian market, and as such, this is what is hurting the developers,

Like any piracy, there isn't any theft (piracy isn't theft unless you somehow take someone elses copy of them) , but unlike regular piracy, there isn't even an oportunity lost. There can be no lost transaction when the publisher *cant* make a transaction in the first place.

Its literally victimless in all known senses.

I take it you feel the same about companies that take GPL code and distribute it without providing the source?

Customs will confiscate any imported copies IF they can identify them. Not sure what the punishment might be, but unless you're attempting to conceal a copy within a shipment of drugs or explosives, Customs won't find it unless you're extremely unlucky.

It's sort of a win, given that an imported UK copy can be purchased for approximately $45, while locally purchased copies will start at $80

Downloading it and not paying for it is really punishing the publisher, and it isn't their fault.

Well you could say it is their fault for expecting their game to slide past one of the most draconian game censors in the world. Not that I'm trying to defend Australia's level of censorship which I think is ridiculous, but I'm just saying. Can't cry "unfair" when the situation is pretty well understood even if it is a bad situation.

And if the game is banned from the country how much material harm are you actually causing EA by pirating it? The ban meant they weren't going to profit from the game in Aust

Since importing the game would be just as much an illegal activity as copying the game, importing is not a legitimate solution. I'm sure that EA's official stance is that they don't want you committing a crime to play their game anyway.

Well, they'd be caught both for stealing and illegal importation to defy a censorship order.

The former should be defensible by demonstrating another product was purchased, i.e. that no sale was lost; the latter, by demonstrating that it is for personal use only, and that no further distribution would take place, perhaps by showing proof that the torrent ratio was tampered with.

"Defence" has a specific legal meaning. The two reasons you listed aren't a "defence" against a guilty verdict. But it may be used to mitigate the sentence, if you plead guilty and get a soft magistrate and unmotivated police-prosecutor.

Cant say, but it will certainly take the wind out of the old and eroneous "lost sales" argument.

But anyway, here's what's going to happen

- Game X is "banned"
-/.er's who don't understand the situation scream about OMG Freedoms.
- Media shit storm in a teacup is created.
- OLFC changes its mind after one minor change.
-/.er's who haven't bothered to keep up scream about OMG Freedoms.
- original/. whingers are now cosplaying as William Wallace shouting OMG FREEEEEEDOMS.
- Game gets released on Oz.
-/.er's still whinging about Freedoms.
- Smart Australians order games from overseas regardless (thank you parallel importing).

I swear we'll still be hearing about this six months from now. I mean the article mentioned Left4Dead when it was released in Oz on November 18 2008, the same day as North America.

He's arguing that it may become available if the publishers make one minor change (similar to changing blood from red to green).

Then that version is legal. It doesn't make the original (international) version legal. If you parallel import an unmodified version, you have imported refused classification material.

(I'm not telling people not to import RC games. Or even pirate them. Go nuts. But people who pirate games know that it's against local copyright laws, and are willing to risk the low chance of detection. Telling people that our Parallel Importation laws somehow magically bypass our classification laws is misleading and wrong.)

-/.er's still whinging about Freedoms.- Smart Australians order games from overseas regardless (thank you parallel importing).

So on one hand you say that/.er's will be whining about Freedoms, but at the same time you say that the people who break a law (being importing of in this case illegal goods - which is what a US/UK copy would be) by ordering it in another country and circumnavigating this law are smart?

So smart and dumb Australians both disagree with the censorship here, the stupid ones try to bring attention to the matter and perhaps get the censorship issues with games resolved by politicians - but the smart ones import

But it's not really one minor change is it? Typically the results is a game drastically different [youtube.com] from the original. Though on the upside Australian users don't need to spend money on expensive hardware given how bodies just magically disappear rather than pile up in the streets. Not to mention the eased load on the physics engine not having to fling body parts around. That makes it less of a distraction too.

Actually why do we have any of this stuff at all? When you shoot someone why doesn't the body just d

"Banning" means it was "refused classification" by OFLC. So buying a version online is "Importation and possession of refused-classification material." P2P pirating it would also add "Distribution of refused-classification material." And that puts it in the same category as importation, possession and distribution of child pornography. And this remains the case even if the OFLC later reclassifies it after the distributor re-submits a modified version.

I was thinking the same thing. I didn't know about this game and just checked it out because of this very item (I loved syndicate wars, pity it's just another fps). If I was a paranoid sort of guy I would almost think this is some sort of viral marketing technique. Grease a few palms to over rate our game, money well spent. But to be fair I don't know enough about the process to know how much it is open to this...
Would be interested if someone here knew more

Now I HAVE to get this game. I was going to get it anyway, because I played the old one made by Bullfrog. I hope it's just as good.

I'm afraid if any company can ruin the old idea then it would be Electronic Arts. And seeing that they changed it from a tactical shooter to an FPS then it seems that they are on course for a disappointment. All they have done is use the same name to convince fans of the old game to buy this one. For all I know it might be a great game, but that will be despite the name "Syndicate". But I guess the tactic works; except for Aussies - they weren't fooled!

Agent Smith: Dr_Barnowl (yes he can pronounce an underscore) of slashdot? We're here to ask you a few questions about your recent attempt to divide by 0Dr_Barnowl: BLLuueeggthss *shows bowl containing brain*Agent Smith: Not again. Jones, get the funnel.

Why be surprised that the R18+ rating has taken force when the article from the linked Slashdot story said:

O'Connor said the R18+ legislation did not make it into this year's final parliament session, but he plans to introduce it in the February 2012 session.

And like others have said here, perhaps it was the lack of imagination for remaking an isometric team-based game as an FPS that offended the classification board so much.

I can only hope that they release the original game on GOG.com to coincide with the new release. Mind you, that might confuse and disappoint some Aussies who find the only game of that name which is available to them is not what they t

For me Jeremy Brett is the definitive Holmes. He's actually how I imagined Holmes to look, pretty much, before I ever saw anyone play him. Apparently he took the role so seriously and so deeply into his psyche it messed his head up a bit. Cool.;)

I'll admit it's been a long time since I played the original Syndicate, and my memory isn't the best, but I seem to remember sending a team of 4 highly-augmented cyborg agents out with mini-guns to mow down bad guys and civilians alike; seems kinda violent to me. Sure, you didn't have ultra-realistic graphics, but books generally contain no graphics and can still be plenty violent.

That's not to say that I don't expect this new game to be a travesty of course.

I take it you never set a civilian on fire and let them run through a crowd. On the US box for Syndicate Wars was the sub title:Corporate Persuasion Through Urban Violence

I played both the original Syndicate and also Syndicate Wars in my youth. Personally I would have loved to see a proper sequel in the 3rd person view where you control 1 or more agents. Syndicate Wars ran great on my 486 dx2 66 with 8MB ram, with modern hardware you could have more agents, larger levels better AI and improved graphics.

The original Syndicate was horrifically violent; but it wasn't explicitly violent. It was just suggested or abstracted away. You could mind control a random citizen to kill his friends, then leave him behind to be shot... or take him with you to forcibly remove many body parts and permanently make him a slave.

like fallout 3.
i would pay good money for a sequel to a great game if it actually had the gameplay that i loved about the original. something like this is so generic and tired i don't think i'll even bother pirating it.

Please remember that this is the country that banned nearly all guns because one psycho shot up a shopping mall. For a country that has so many chompy, stingy, poisonous monsters, they sure are fearful.

Instead of trying for a more unique format (3rd person action/strategy) they decided to go with the FPS format. That is what I liked about the older games is they were willing to try different things, granted the AI and graphics kind of sucked, but given how underpowered those machines were it becomes forgivable. I would have loved for there to be an actual update for Syndicate or Syndicate Wars using the 3rd person view where you control your agents but with more expansive maps, more interactions, better A

Violent gaming can provide a therapeutic release of anger that can benefit the players in real-life. Whenever a government blocks an activity that releases a tension, such as the gaming or prostitution, then statistics show a rise in bad activities that also release the tension, such as real violence, or sex crimes.